We’ve watched generational shifts in values and attitude with particularly accelerating velocity beginning in the post-WWII era. European colonialization slowly yielded to a mass of newly enfranchised independent states, some accepting democratic principles, others succumbing to autocracy. The true “empire of evil” – murderous genocidal WWII Germany – slowly evolved to replace the United States as the global poster-country for liberal democracy, equality for all. The leadership that made it so was born of a younger generation’s questioning their parents about their elders’ role in the Holocaust and in Nazi power in general. That was part of a turbulent time: the late 1960s and early 1970s.
In the United States, the nation was embroiled anti-Vietnam War protests. In Germany, there were rising protests from virulent leftists against the entirety of the German establishment. Names like the Baader-Meinhoff, which evolved into the Red Army Brigade, created a wave of angry young people asking their parents’ generation to explain what they did during the Nazi era and why they did not try to stop the genocide. Riots. Police lines. Tear gas. Domestic terrorism. Today, many of those angry protestors have formed the bastion of the major controlling political parties. A German child cannot graduate from the equivalent of high school without having visited a preserved concentration camp. German textbooks are the only major such books in any infamous society – certainly including the United States where some recent textbooks described slaves as “immigrants” – that fully admitted culpability for their Holocaust.
England is undergoing a shift of its own, a post-Brexit questioning by the rising generations of the efficacy of continuing the British throne, much at taxpayer expense. The trigger for this increasingly raucous debate is the separation of Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle from the Royal household culminating in the notorious interview of the couple on March 7th by Oprah Winfrey. Another generational divide.
Christina Boyle and Laura King, writing for the March 20th Los Angeles Times, explain: “Britons as a whole strongly support the institution of the monarchy, with about two-thirds in favor of maintaining it, according to a YouGov poll last week. Among those age 18 to 24, though, that backing falls to less than half.
“In the post-interview poll, a solid majority of Britons between 18 and 24 voiced approval of Meghan and Harry, who spoke openly of their struggles with racism, mental health issues, a callous palace culture and a mendacious, intrusive tabloid press. Their elders, particularly those over 65, expressed sharp disapproval of both, particularly Meghan…
“To the outside world, the British monarchy is still an object of fascination, and its many trappings — castles and crowns, horse-drawn carriages and resplendent red-clad palace guards — are a huge tourist draw. That meshes well with Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s drive to build a ‘global Britain’ brand, based less on economic clout than a unique cultural character… But those who would like to see the monarchy scrapped have been quick to point out that ongoing discord surrounding the interview does little to burnish an image of Britain’s mystique.
“In Harry and Meghan’s saga, many younger people saw a missed opportunity for reinvigoration. Michael Duffy, a 25-year-old Londoner originally from Ireland, said that when the two wed, he thought they might bring change to a tired and outmoded royal establishment… ‘It was going to bring it into the 21st century,’ he said. ‘I just thought that Meghan and Harry were going to be a bit more with the times, really.’” No one can dispute that the Royalty and its accoutrements are good for tourism, a clear economic benefit. There is a link to Britain’s past that lingers fondly as well.
In our own country, there is a generational divide that threatens the very existence of the nation. A legacy government, created in 1789 when the United States was 94% agricultural, has effectively given rural states the 1.8 times the voting power of urban states. Wyoming with around 600,000 people elects two US Senators, the same number of US Senators that represent California with over 39 million people. Thus, about 30% of the United States elects 70% of the Senate.
These rural states are attempting to double down of what has de facto become generally under-educated white Christian voters by attempting to disenfranchise minority voters through voter suppression and gerrymandering. Those most affected by the complexity of rising educational standards for most jobs, growing obsolescence in certain job sectors and the influx of artificially intelligence-driven automation are those older voters justifiably feeling left behind. Most of the younger rising generations are more focused on decreasing upward mobility, the high cost of specialized education, housing costs and the growing ravages of climate change. They are equally more tolerant of racial, ethnic and gender differences, less likely to need to find scapegoats to explain their own failures.
The Republican Party has opted to lock into those older, unworkable rural “return to yesteryear” values, literally ignoring the concerns that will define those generations that take over and setting battle lines between generations that just could break this country into smaller nations with reconfigured affiliations. A violent upheaval. Change is inevitable. It can evolve, erupt or evaporate… but it will never stop. The generational divide is frequency the delivery vehicle.
I’m Peter Dekom, and while change and progress might be delayed, it can never be stopped no matter the pressure and the willing to bend and break social norms.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment